浅议作文教学应从何处着手

搞好初中作文教学,一直是广大语文教师努力的目标。本文从作文教学的命题、构思、选材、文体、语言五个角度进行了解读,详细阐述了作文教学的方法和技巧,为广大师生以后的教学和学习提供了科学的参考。     

激发学生兴趣提高作文质量

本文从作文的命题、写作的选材、教师的批语及讲评等方面提出激发学生写作兴趣，进而提高作文质量的一些有效方法。     

在作文教学中巧用学生的积极心理

一般的写作教学过程包括命题、指导、评改三个部分。我认为,在作文教学中也可以对学生进行心理指导,教导孩子如何积极主动地面对学习生活。     

立足学为中心,螺旋设问,大胆放权

基于学为中心的数学课堂,应该多一些设问,多一些放权,多一些自主探究的权利,以此给予学生更多思维延伸的自由和空间。把课堂还给学生,让学生积极主动地参与学习的整个过程,养成学生主动思考、探索的习惯。     

写人作文指导课教学例谈

想要在写作教学中探出一条路,再次唤起学生写作的青春,必须强调学生的自主学习。首先要把作文学习与学生的生活、生命、成长、发展联系起来,让学生在兴趣的带领下,变成有内容可写,我要写。其次,作文要与阅读教学密切配合,充分发挥教材的典范作用,使学生感到“我会写”。第三,用相互肯定的方式,激发学生的自信心,形成“我乐写”的氛围。     

兴趣，让学生作文走入新天地

教师要充分利用学生正确的动机、浓厚的兴趣、热烈的情感、坚强的意志和良好的性格等非智力因素,采培养学生写作的兴趣,文中介绍了在观察生活中培养兴趣、在多样训练中巩固兴趣、在情景创设中增添兴趣、在适宜命题中激发兴趣、在作文评改中强化兴趣、在课外阅读中延伸兴趣,使学生乐于作文,在小学作文教学中有重要的意义。     

作文的命题与评改

命题与评改是一次作文训练的起点和终点，它最能充分体现教师在作文教学中的主导作用，也最能充分体现教师自身的素养和水平，因而也最能体现一次作文训练的效果。 　　先谈谈命题。命题无非就是出题目。老师出个题目让学生写，看起来非常简单，可是作文教学收效甚微往往就先出在这里。题目出不好，学生写不出来，敷衍了事或找别的文章抄了交上来。这样一来，这次作文大家辛苦一场岂不是白费力了吗。 　　作文的命题应体现循序渐进、由易到难的规律，因此，我认为作文命题应该遵循下面两个原则。 　　一、整体性、系统性原则 　　以高中为例…     

学生作文的升格训练

作文教学中，教师常为学生作文水平难以提高而着急。而让学生对原有的作文进行一些升格训练，则不失为一种好方法。作文升格，就是从作文的立意、选材、文体、结构等方面，全面提升作文价值的一种训练方法。这已经引起了广大老师的深入探究和学生的重视。     

学生为主体,教师为主导——初探英语作文评改教学法

作文评改是作文教学的重要一环,是提高学生作文水平的有效途径。评改应是教师与学生、学生与学生之间的信息交流。这也是在教学中自觉贯彻学生为主体、教师为主导这一原则。近年来,我经过反思和探索体会到:提高学生英语作文写作水平要注重英语作文评改教学。     

放权 指导 提高——浅议学生自主评改作文

<正>作文批改是作文教学的重要环节之一。多少年来,学生作文教师改,被公认为是作文教学中天经地义的事,这种观念年深日久,根深蒂固,作文批改也成了语文老师教学工作中的一大负担。传统的作文批改,教师文批、面批,精批细改,课堂讲评,耗时费力;学生周周写,天天练,成效不高,每每发作文本时,学生只     

让每个学生都喜欢作文--浅谈小学起步作文教学

长期以来，学生不喜欢作，对作充满了惧怕之感，丧失了写作的信心和兴趣。这是由于教师一开始就对学生束缚太紧，要求过高。在作起步阶级，应把难点降低，坡度变缓，尊重学生，让学生自由习作；丰富习作内容，与生活融为一体；振动想象的翅膀，放飞习作的心灵，使学生喜欢作，爱上作，乐于写作，并充分享受到写作的快乐。     

高职英语写作教学中激发学生写作兴趣的有效对策

随着高等职业教育的发展,高职英语写作教学的重要性更加明显,由于很多学生对英语写作缺乏学习兴趣,基本处于"被动写作"、"痛苦写作"的境地,所以严重影响了高职英语写作教学的有效性。鉴于此,就英语写作教学中激发学生写作兴趣的有效对策进行探讨,旨在让学生在寓教于乐的课堂氛围下,提高英语写作兴趣,激发学生的写作潜能。     

Tier 3 specialized writing instruction for students with dyslexia

Two instructional experiments used randomized, controlled designs to evaluate the effectiveness of writing instruction for students with carefully diagnosed dyslexia, which is both an oral reading and writing disorder, characterized by impaired word decoding, reading, and spelling. In Study 1 (4th to 6th grade sample and 7th to 9th grade sample), students were randomly assigned to orthographic or morphological spelling treatment but all students were taught strategies for planning, writing, and reviewing/revising narrative and expository texts. Both treatments resulted in improvement on three measures of spelling and one measure of composition. Morphological treatment resulted in better improvement in spelling pseudowords, whereas orthographic treatment resulted in better improvement in rate of reading pseudowords. In Study 2 (4th to 6th grade sample), students were randomly assigned to explicit language treatment (phonological working memory + phonological-orthographic spelling + science report writing training) or nonverbal problem solving treatment (virtual reality-based computer simulation, drawing maps, and building clay models). Both treatments used science content material and resulted in significant improvement in spelling and reading pseudowords (accuracy and rate). The surprising finding was that hands-on, engaging science problem solving led to more improvement in phonological working memory than did specialized phonological instruction. Only when spelling instruction emphasized orthography or morphology (Study 1) did real word spelling improve. Preparation of this chapter was supported by Grant Nos. HD25858 and P50 33812 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). In Study 1 teaching assistants included Sylvia Abbott, Marci Anderson-Youngstrom, Belle Chennault, Kate Eschen, Noelia Garcia, Sandra Hiramatsu, Lynn Junell, Julia Kim, Stephanie King, Shin-Ju (Cindy) Lin, Rebecca Metzger, Heather Murphy, Jennifer Norton, Sue Palewicz, Rebecca Pirie, and Suzanna West. Also on the assessment team were Sylvia Abbott, Belle Chenault, Kate Eschen, and Rebecca Pirie. Certified teachers Diana Hoffer and Christina Johnson implemented the composition lessons written by the first author. In Study 2, teaching assistants included Nicole Alston-Abel, Leah Altemeier, Wade Altom, Marci Anderson-Youngstrom, Annie Boyd, Nicole Garcia, Laura Gould, Marta Holsinger, Yen-Ling Lee, Shin-Ju (Cindy) Lin, Laurie McCarthy, Heather Murphy, Hema O’Shea, Michelle Proux, Kristine Tardiff, and Kari Terjeson. Janine Jones supervised the assessment team. Margaret McShane and Doug Stock served as administrative assistants.     

Undergraduate students searching and reading Web sources for writing

With the Internet-evoked paradigm shift in the academy, there has been a growing interest in students’ Web-based information-seeking and source-use practices. Nevertheless, little is known as to how individual students go about searching for sources online and selecting source material for writing particular assignments. This exploratory study focuses on the Web-based searching and reading practices of a group of undergraduate students at a university in Hong Kong in preparing their end-of-semester written assignments. The data drawn upon included interviews and the students’ process logs and their notes from reading. The study revealed that the students employed a range of search engines to conduct online research, they skim-read and read around search terms to select sources and source content, and they took indexical notes to document their decisions over citations for their essay. The paper ends by pointing out some pedagogical implications of the study and suggesting in-depth case studies as an avenue of further research.     

对高职学生开展创造性英文写作课的探索

高职学生是一特殊的学习群体，为提高学生的认知能力和实现真正意义上的素质教育，本文探索了针对高职学生的认知心理进行创造性英文写作的理论根据及具体措施。     

Teaching writing to middle school students: a national survey

A random sample of language arts, social studies, and science middle school teachers from the United States were surveyed about their preparation to teach writing, beliefs about responsibilities for teaching writing, use of evidence-based writing practices, assessment of writing, use of technology, and adaptations for struggling writers. The findings from this survey raised concerns about the quality of middle school writing instruction. Many teachers believed their preservice and inservice preparation to teach writing was inadequate. Middle school students spend little time writing or being taught how to write. While most teachers used a variety of evidenced-based writing practices and made adaptations for struggling writers, such methods were applied infrequently. Most teachers did not appear to use assessment data to shape how they taught writing, and computers played a relatively minor role in middle school writing instruction. Even though teachers generally agreed that writing was a collective responsibility, language arts teachers placed a greater emphasis on writing instruction than social studies and science teachers.     

如何加强大学生应用文写作能力培养

大学英语教学的任务包括听、说、读、写、译等综合能力的培养,其中大学英语写作能力的培养至关重要.写作是对大学英语综合实际应用能力的锻炼,是对于学生能力全面检查和考核的一项指标.目前大学在校生的写作水平普遍较低,英语写作表达能力较弱.写作能力的培养,除了有助于学生顺利地通过各类英语等级考试,满足职业英语应试需要,还有利于日后工作的顺利完成及提升在单位的综合实力.因此,作为大学英语教师迫切需要探讨和解决如何培养学生英文写作兴趣的问题.     

Using modeled writing to support English-only and English-learner second-grade students

This study compared 70 English learners (ELs) and English-only (EO) second-grade students' writing samples before and after a yearlong writing program. The school utilized Write From the Beginning (J. Buckner, 2006) and focused on personal narratives. A subgroup of students also participated in an intervention supporting expository writing on curricular topics. Sociocognitive theory framed the Modeled Writing (MW) used in this study. An analysis of covariance used prescores on 2 writing assessments to compare students' writing achievement at the end of the year, and t tests compared students' writing by gender, language, and group on various pre- and posttest scores. Results indicate that MW benefited both EOs and ELs and that the MW students outscored the controls on all items of the standardized writing assessment at year's end. The comparison affords greater understanding of writing development and achievement differences among young ELs and EOs and suggests instructional and research opportunities.